export_mesh_library

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It indicates a write operation ('Export') but fails to mention side effects (e.g., file overwrite behavior, required permissions, error handling, or whether the original scene is modified).

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single sentence, highly concise and front-loaded. However, it could be slightly expanded to include essential context without sacrificing brevity.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the complexity of an export tool (no output schema, no annotations, 4 parameters), the description is too minimal. It does not explain what a MeshLibrary is, the export process, or any important considerations like file conflicts or supported mesh types.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The tool description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema, which already describes each parameter. Thus, the parameter semantics are adequate but not enhanced.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action (Export) and the resource (scene as MeshLibrary), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it does not differentiate from siblings like save_scene, but since no other export tool exists, uniqueness is implied.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus other scene-related tools, nor are prerequisites or context for invocation given. The description lacks any usage instructions.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.